(URGENT) Requirements should be rendered as real Tables in ISO documents

[ronaldtse]

Word:

PDF:

It should look like this instead, and the Requirements URIs should be shown:

NOTE: Notice this table is somehow split across two, this clearly is a bug.

[ronaldtse]

• The "Requirement 1: ..." text should become the Table caption.
• The "Identifier" field name should be shown explicitly. The value of the identifier should be shown in monospace font (probably should be encoded as such?)
• The "Description" field should be shown explicitly, not a merge of two column cells.

[ronaldtse]

The table width should be max width.

[ronaldtse]

Sample of the desired rendering:

NOTE: The "Guidance" part shall be encoded separately into the table. We will likely not use NOTE or EXAMPLE in the requirements because they are numbered per-clause, yet we have multiple requirements in a clause.

[ronaldtse]

Desired Requirements class rendering:

[opoudjis]

You are working off obsolete versions of the code, which had not been merged, the requirement URIs are displaying now.

[opoudjis]

NOTE: Notice this table is somehow split across two, this clearly is a bug.

I have enough to do already. I am not actioning this, and keeping tables on one page is an utterly unreasonable request, as you will find out soon enough if I implement it, and then you complain about it with a too-large table.

[opoudjis]

Provisions is only being implicitly specified, which is poor practice from both OGC and the ticket author.

[opoudjis]

This ticket is introducing the completely repulsive requirement of flavour-specific post-processing of modspec

[opoudjis]

Changes that turn out to have been ISO-specific, I have introduced to general Modspec in mn-requirements. This is a mess, and the outputs will need to be reviewed for OGC and for ISO.

[opoudjis]

Restoring as default behaviour for Modspec the OGC behaviour of identifier spanning both columns.

[opoudjis]

• The "Requirement 1: ..." text should become the Table caption.
• The "Identifier" field name should be shown explicitly. The value of the identifier should be shown in monospace font (probably should be encoded as such?)
• The "Description" field should be shown explicitly, not a merge of two column cells.
• The table width should be max width.
• Numbering of notes and examples in tables and notes by clause, as with rest of ISO (being under tables)
• Provisions grouping of included requirements

[ronaldtse]

Table should use normal table style

Requirements are rendered in a table (which is good) but the borders are currently missing. In OGC, all tables are not rendered with borders because OGC applies background colors to headers and cells.

Requirements class rendering should render associated requirements ID only

The "red box" below is the actual requirements content of Requirement 1, but it should have been rendered as shown in the blue (the red box should be removed).

[opoudjis]

I now remember why I treated modspec tables specially. Your insistence that Modspec tables not be centered.

If Modspec tables are not to be centered in ISO HTML, and Modspec tables are not to be treated specially, then it follows that NO tables in ISO HTML are to be treated specially.

Kindly confirm, because flippantly undoing three years of formatting is not something I am going to do as a result of interpreting vague obiter dicta.

[opoudjis]

All tables under ISO are max width already.

[opoudjis]

This ticket is now implemented, pending review from @ronaldtse

[ronaldtse]

Need to set table cells as left align

"Requirement" description should be called "Statement"

In a requirement, the phrase should be "statement" (I can change the encoding), because the statement is the "thing" to be complied with.

In a requirements class, the term "Description" is correct, because it is the description of what the requirements class is.

Citations of ModSpec instances outside ModSpec instances

Right now, they show up as "{modspec class name} {number}: {modspec instance id}" within ModSpec instances. This is good.

But in other body content, references look like this:

Now, this is confusing. ModSpec instances are implemented as Tables, they should point to table references instead. However, the ideal way to point to them is to refer to them as "Requirement: 123" without the long identifier. I don't know what is the correct way of doing this.

For now, let's do the following:

• by default, the reference is "Table XX, Requirement YY"
• in the ModSpec instance, show "Requirement YY: /req/xxx/yyy".

[opoudjis]

"Requirement" description should be called "Statement"

Note: not doing either in OGC, explicit label as Requirement or Statement is only done in ISO.

[opoudjis]

For this to work, am storing both Modspec xref including identifier, and excluding it (as @anchors[id][:xref_bare])